Diltiazem said:Dumb question.
Why call it CR3?
Canon could have made all the changes and still could have called it CR2. What am I missing?
Diltiazem said:Dumb question.
Why call it CR3?
Canon could have made all the changes and still could have called it CR2. What am I missing?
Or - some humorous answer - they may want to state that it is certainly (CR3) Canon Raw instead of .. probably (CR2) Canon Raw (Sorry I could not resist!) ;D ;D ;DSharlin said:Diltiazem said:Dumb question.
Why call it CR3?
Canon could have made all the changes and still could have called it CR2. What am I missing?
If they're making a large change to the structure of the file format itself, it might warrant a bump in "major version" instead of just releasing a new version of CR2. There might be enough accumulated cruft and backwards compatible hacks that they want to fix even though AFAICS CR2 is a pretty flexible file format.
mistaspeedy said:According to DXOmark's data, there is an absolutely huge difference between the 200D and Canon M3.
When you set the camera to ISO 3200, the actual ISO on the 200D is only 2125! Whilst the actual ISO on the M3 is close-to-ideal ISO 3133. This is nearly a quite massive 50% difference in sensitivity (3133 is 47.4% more than 2125).
7D mark II gives 2458 ISO at the same setting.
This has real-world implications for shooting. If you were using a certain ISO and shutter speed on the Canon M3, you can no longer use it on the 7D mark II or 200D... you would possibly need to bump the ISO up one stop to get a proper exposure.
We are not doing an apples to apples comparison in dynamic range tests if we set both cameras to 'ISO 3200' in the settings.
We could arbitrarily slap the 'ISO 3200' label onto a camera with a real ISO 100 setting, and it would beat all other currently manufactured cameras.
This is why comparisons like this give a clearer picture than the link you offered, which is clearly labelled "Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting'... unfortunately there is a discrepancy between "ISO setting" and "actual ISO sensitivity", a huge one.
https://ibb.co/n0zLQx
Diltiazem said:Dumb question.
Why call it CR3?
Canon could have made all the changes and still could have called it CR2. What am I missing?
Diltiazem said:Why call it CR3?
Canon could have made all the changes and still could have called it CR2. What am I missing?
Don Haines said:Also, it states that the C-Raw files are 40 percent smaller than the CR3 files and about the same size as the old RAW files....
HaroldC3 said:If CR is correct about the price (around current M6 prices), it will decimate all previous body sales.
snoke said:Don Haines said:Also, it states that the C-Raw files are 40 percent smaller than the CR3 files and about the same size as the old RAW files....
This answer. CR3 because compression change.
Canon follow Apple, replace JPEG by HEIF in CR3?
https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7391.0
Magic Lantern show JPEG for RAW, don't understand?
snoke said:Canon follow Apple, replace JPEG by HEIF in CR3?
rrcphoto said:Quackator said:Certainly it will be the first Canon with their new sensor generation.
getting a WAY ahead of things and setting yourself up for disappointment.
rrcphoto said:Quackator said:Certainly it will be the first Canon with their new sensor generation.
getting a WAY ahead of things and setting yourself up for disappointment.
Jack Douglas said:rrcphoto said:Quackator said:Certainly it will be the first Canon with their new sensor generation.
getting a WAY ahead of things and setting yourself up for disappointment.
Isn't this inevitable in threads such as this!! ;D
Jack